The Canadian NATO Parliamentary Association has
the honour to present its report on the visit of the 79th Rose-Roth
Seminar, held in Marseilles, France from May 11 to May 13, 2012 and the visit
of the Mediterranean and Middle East Special Group (GSM) which was held
jointly.
Canada was represented by Senator Raynell
Andreychuk
OPENING SESSION
Michel Vauzelle, Chairman of the region
Provence-Alpes-Côte d’Azur, welcomed participants of the meeting and noted that
the destinies of the northern and the southern flanks of the Mediterranean
region are intertwined. The northern Mediterranean should not be regarded as a
frontier between two civilisations, but rather as a part of a broader
Mediterranean region. He also praised the role of the NATO as a defender of our
common values. Mr Vauzelle additionally noted that the current French
leadership’s decision to revisit France’s place within NATO, as outlined by
former President Charles de Gaulle, was perhaps too hasty. France’s global
role, particularly vis-à-vis North Africa, could have been more productive if
the country was not exclusively seen as an integral part of one
political-military bloc, Mr Vauzelle said.
Loïc Bouvard thanked Mr Vauzelle for hosting the
seminar and expressed appreciation for his frank remarks. While views on the
scope of France’s participation in NATO structures may differ among French
politicians, the important role of NATO is unquestionable. Mr Bouvard also
noted that one could hardly find a better place than Marseilles to discuss the
developments in the dynamic Mediterranean region. Throughout its rich history,
Marseilles has been and remains France’s door to Africa and the Middle East.
Mr Bouvard highlighted the value of modesty when
dealing with the MENA region. The fact that our experts could not predict an
event of the Arab Spring’s calibre shows that we have still much to learn about
this region. The ultimate goal of the seminar is help identify areas where the
Euro-Atlantic community – and the NATO Parliamentary Assembly in particular –
could provide assistance to the countries of the region facing formidable
transition challenges.
Dr Lamers thanked the region of the Alps, Provence
and Cote d’Azur for all its support for the seminar. He noted that this is the
first time ever that a Rose Roth seminar had been organized in conjunction with
the GSM Seminar. Dr Lamers noted that the Middle East and North Africa has been
a key priority for his Presidency.
The President of the Assembly paid tribute to all
those who believed that a better life was possible and had demonstrated the
courage to act on that conviction. The people of the region are the ultimate
arbiters of their fate, he said. The international community may be asked to
help, politically, economically – and perhaps even, as was the case in Libya,
militarily. What kinds of assistance should be extended must be assessed on a
case-by-case basis. Dr Lamers also joined Mr Bouvard in urging his Assembly
colleagues to be humble, to listen carefully and understand the complex
sensitivities of the MENA region.
The President of the Assembly also used the
opportunity to call on the Syrian regime to accept the terms of the UN plan and
put an end to senseless violence.
Fayez Al-Tarawneh, Member of the Jordanian Senate,
welcomed the participants on behalf of the Parliamentary Assembly of the
Mediterranean. He noted that both PAM and the NATO PA share the same values of
individual liberty, democracy, human rights and the rule of law.
Mr Al-Tarawneh stressed that PAM, a forum
gathering parliamentarians from 28 countries of the Mediterranean region, stood
with the peoples of Tunisia, Egypt and Libya, and mobilized its network of
parliamentary diplomacy in order to provide immediate and long term
humanitarian assistance, as well as legislative expertise, to facilitate
democratic transition processes through constitutional reforms and fair
elections. In particular, the Assembly has sent a high-level field mission to
Tunis where it met with the President of this country at the onset of the
Jasmine Revolution. In close collaboration with the UN Secretary General, H.E.
Mr Ban Ki-moon, PAM maintained a channel of communication with Libya in the
midst of the conflict, facilitating UN missions to the country and securing a
humanitarian corridor to Misrata. The PAM Secretary General is also in contact
with Kofi Annan as well as other important actors in the Syrian crisis. PAM has
also provided a forum in which the Vice Presidents of the Knesset and the
Palestine National Council (PNC), who are both also PAM Vice Presidents, meet
regularly, thus facilitating the Middle East Peace Process. Thanks to the
commitment of its parliamentarians, PAM has become a fully operational
Mediterranean parliamentary tool devoted to promoting the welfare, safety and
stability of Mediterranean citizens, Mr Al-Tarawneh said.
The seminar’s keynote speaker Caroline Dumas, from
the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs, spoke on “Arab Springs: Opportunities
and Uncertainties”. She stressed that the wave of events in the MENA region
have triggered far reaching changes in the region, including shifting regional
balances and alliances. This has many implications, she said, and has added
even more complications to achieving comprehensive peace in the Middle East.
She also discussed the changing role of some key actors in the region,
including the United States, the EU, France, Iran and Turkey.
While traditionally Western policy makers stressed
stability as a fundamental policy aim, support for the status quo ultimately
proved destabilizing. Pervasive corruption, oppressive and unrepresentative
governments, mounting economic problems and rapid demographic changes had laid
the foundations for a politically explosive situation. Some governments have
managed to survive the ensuing maelstrom by promising reforms, others, however,
resorted to repression violence and several of these, of course, have subsequently
fallen.
The wave of revolutions has created an historic
opportunity for the people of the region to become protagonists in fulfilling
their economic and political aspirations; yet, uncertainties remain. New
leaders, sometimes with little political experience, are faced with formidable
challenges. The normal challenges of governing are further exacerbated by
sectarian and/or ethnic tensions. It has yet to be seen if the rise of the
parties emphasising Islamic values jeopardise the original goals of these
revolutions. Ms Dumas concluded by arguing that despite uncertainties, the
region’s transformation represents an opportunity to mobilize new talent and
build more prosperous and democratic societies. It also provides an opportunity
for Europe to deepen partnerships with the region.
DEMOCRACY, HUMAN RIGHTS AND ISLAM
The session was chaired by Senator Antonio Cabras
(Italy), Chairman of the NATO PA Mediterranean and Middle East Special Group.
The speaker, Mr Fadi Hakura, Head of the Turkey
Project at Chatham House, characterized Turkey’s international role as aspiring
to serve as a friend of the oppressed people and a beacon of democracy and
freedom. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, he noted, is probably the most
popular foreign political figure in the region. The speaker suggested, however,
that the reality is more complex, and Turkey’s foreign policy is also driven by
other factors, including personal relations between Mr Erdogan and leaders of
MENA countries as well as certain sectarian considerations.
Turkey’s Justice and Development Party (AKP) has
demonstrated that a party emphasising Islamic values can also be democratic. Mr
Hakura argued, however, that the Turkish model is cannot easily be applied to
Arab countries in transition. The Turkish model relies heavily on party
leaders. The AKP also harbours significantly different economic views than most
parties in the Arab world; the AKP is much more pro-business, while the Muslim
Brotherhood is somewhat suspicious of free markets and foreign investors. He
noted that many Egyptians, for example, now see Saudi Arabia as a model rather
than Turkey.
Mr Hakura argued that Turkey nevertheless has a
distinctive role to play in the region. He argued that Ankara’s foreign policy
is most effective when it enjoys good relations with all the key parties,
including the Gulf Arab states, Egypt, the United States, the UK, Israel,
Germany, Russia and Iran. Turkey’s democratic credentials are the most
effective instrument for exercising Turkey’s influence in the region, the
speaker concluded.
During the ensuing discussion, members of Turkish
delegation to the NATO PA dismissed the idea that Turkey is backsliding in
terms of democratic norms and human rights. They stressed that Turkey is a
democratic and stable country in what is an unstable and volatile region.
Turkey does not want to interfere in internal affairs of neighbouring
countries, but merely wishes to play a role as an honest broker in order to
promote democratic institutions and stability across the region. Turkey can
also serve as an example of how Islamic values and democracy can be
complementary, the Turkish parliamentarians said. Several participants also
noted that one must be careful using the term “secularism”, since it is a very
toxic word in this part of the world and is often understood as atheism.
THE ROLE OF EXTERNAL ACTORS IN THE MENA REGION
The session was moderated by Senator Raynell
Andreychuk, Rapporteur of the GSM.
Bernardino Leon, European Union Special
Representative for the Southern Mediterranean, discussed the changing EU
perspective of the MENA Region. In Europe, the Arab Spring has essentially been
understood as a positive phenomenon, even though events in Syria are very
worrisome. Although the region may be shaky at the moment, eventually it should
become more stable precisely because it is opening up. Authoritarianism was
hardly a formula for long-term stability, he noted.
Those orchestrating the transitions will confront
daunting political and economic challenges. International support is essential.
The EU has a special role since it is the only actor that can be a partner in
all three major pillars of transformation: security, development and human
rights. Other international actors are also welcome to contribute, Mr Leon said.
He particularly stressed that closer coordination of various international
efforts is key to success.
The EU is living up to its responsibilities, Mr
Leon argued. The EU’s financial contribution to the region has increased from 6
to 11 billion Euros. The EU has created task forces to develop efficient
cooperation with several countries in the MENA region. The EU’s economic
support to Tunisia’s transition is particularly important; the EU is now
working on increasing support to Jordan, Egypt and Morocco. The EU is also
considering how it can best assist democratic transition of Libya and Algeria.
Mr Leon noted that most of regional economies today are in a very bad shape,
and more assistance to those countries is essential.
Sujata Sharma, discussed the evolving US
perspective of the MENA region. She said that President Obama in his Cairo
speech as well as the Secretary of State Hilary Clinton have made it clear that
dictatorships in the MENA region have no future. While the United States,
contrary to some allegations, had no role in triggering the protest movements,
it firmly supports the demands of the people of this region for basic freedoms,
human rights, gender equality and political democratisation. These are
universal values, Ms Sharma stressed.
She also noted that the US is prepared for
dialogue with the new regional leaders and is reaching out to all political
parties, including to groups with which it has some disagreements. The United
States is not deterred by the label “Islamist” bestowed upon some political
parties in the region, as long as these parties demonstrate their commitment to
human rights, gender equality and the rule of law. Ms Sharma also stressed that
all international actors – the US, EU and others – have a role to play supporting
legitimate aspirations of the people of the MENA region. Efforts should be
redoubled to engage not just with governments, but also with entrepreneurs,
civil society, academia and religious leaders.
The next panellist, Mr Gabriele Cascone, an
analyst with the NATO Emerging Security Challenges Division, presented his
personal views on strategic developments in the MENA region. He pointed out
that reform and democratisation processes will be long and difficult, but they
should eventually lead to a more democratic MENA region.
It is important to bear in mind that the situation
across the region varies greatly he said. A tailored approach towards each
country is needed. NATO is well aware of this and devised its Mediterranean
Dialogue and ICI programmes accordingly.
Mr Cascone noted that the Arab League supported
the UN-mandated NATO mission in Libya. This represents a fundamental change:
until recently no one could imagine NATO being called upon by the Arab
countries to support those challenging a government in the region. This does
not mean that NATO has a role to play in regional security crises in the
future, but clearly the Alliance is now seen as a much more prominent actor in
the region. The Alliance has always been extremely careful when offering its
support to the MENA countries. Yet given the Arab League’s encouragement for a
NATO role in the Libyan operation, the Alliance might become less reluctant to
offer its services and assistance in the reform process, Mr Cascone suggested.
While the NATO Chicago Summit is expected to review the Alliance’s strategy
towards the region, in the speaker’s view, NATO is not likely to become a major
security player in the region and is more apt to play a supportive role,
focusing its efforts in the region primarily on security and defence sector
reform.
During the subsequent discussion with the
panellists, participants asked how the EU intends to assist the MENA countries
faced with formidable economic challenges, including high unemployment. Mr Leon
replied that many of these countries have relatively strong economies and noted
that the Euro-Atlantic community is not positioned to serve as a central
catalyst for developing these economies. Direct financial aid is certainly less
important than the opportunities that the West can provide, such as access to
European markets and facilitating travel to Europe, especially for scientists,
entrepreneurs and students. Assistance in recovery of assets of former
dictators and their entourage is more than just a symbolic political issue: it
also has a tangible economic value for the countries of the region, Mr Leon
said. Mr Al-Tarawneh (PAM) noted that international financial assistance is not
necessarily without negative consequences: accepting the IMF support, for
example, generally compels recipients to make changes in economic and fiscal
policies that they would otherwise not be willing to undertake.
ECONOMIC EXPECTATION GENERATED BY THE ARAB SPRING:
A CHALLENGE FOR THE NEW ORDER
The session was moderated by Hugh Bayley (United
Kingdom), Vice-president of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly.
The first speaker of the session, Ambassador
Richard A. Boucher, Deputy Secretary-General of the Organisation for Economic
Development and Co-operation (OECD), discussed economic conditions and social
change in the MENA region. According to the speaker, changes that have occurred
in the Arab world have exposed many of the region’s problems, but also present
new opportunities to carry out substantial reforms that could spur future
economic growth. The most significant challenge the region confronts is the
disproportionate weight of the state in national economies and the lack of
space for the private sector. Several countries are overly susceptible to oil
and food price fluctuations. The labour market is inflexible, making it
difficult for new people to find a job and contributing to the growth of shadow
employment. Women and youth are clearly underemployed. 80% of women are
excluded from the work force, which means that these countries are missing out
on an enormous pool of talent.
On the positive side, the potential for economic
growth is significant thanks, in part, to the proximity to European markets and
the abundance of young, dynamic and relatively well-educated people in these
societies. In addition, the region is rich in energy resources: not just oil
and gas, but also solar energy – a resource that ought to be more fully
exploited, Ambassador Boucher said. Tourism is another potential growth sector,
not least because the region is geographically easily accessible to Europe.
Ambassador Boucher described the ways in which the
OECD is assisting MENA countries in developing economic reform programs. He
stressed that international assistance and co-operation programmes should focus
on economic liberalisation designed to unleash private initiative and
supporting professional re-training projects. Bloated governance mechanisms
should be reduced and modernised, in part by employing modern information and
communication technologies and by tackling corruption. If systemic reforms are
implemented, these countries could position themselves to become “world-class
economies”, Ambassador Boucher noted.
The second panellist, Mats Karlsson, Director for
the Center for Mediterranean Integration, focused on transformation and
integration in the Euro-Mediterranean area. He suggested that while the MENA
countries have a formidable political and economic reform agenda ahead of them,
they will not succeed without a concurrent integrational agenda and without
linking their national economies to international value chains. These countries
trade very little with the outside world: if one excludes hydrocarbons, their
combined exports are comparable to that of Switzerland alone. He suggested that
freer access to European markets would contribute significantly to the
development of competitive and diversified economies in the southern
Mediterranean region.
The MENA countries also need to remove
intra-regional trade barriers as the level of intra-regional trade is
negligible. It is critical to promote freer movement not only of goods, but
also services, labour and capital across the region. The MENA region has much
to learn from the integrational experiences of other regions including Europe.
Job creation directly correlates to a higher degree of international
integration, Mr Karlsson argued. Furthermore, regional economic integration
would only reinforce the need for structural economic reforms across the region
and would effectively counter the negative image of free market economy, which,
under the old regimes, was far too often associated with “crony capitalism”.
An ambitious reform agenda requires fiscal space
which can be acquired only by revisiting old subsidy policies, particularly
fuel subsidies. These supports consume an estimated 3-5% of GDP in many MENA
countries, and their economic effects are highly distorting and undermine the
region’s growth prospects. Both Mr Karlsson and Ambassador Boucher criticised the
universal character of fuel and food subsidies which have failed to distinguish
those in need from those who have no need for subsides. They both recommended
that the region’s governments switch to more targeted subsidies to assist the
weakest members of society.
During the discussion, Said Chbaatou (Morocco)
pointed to significant philosophical differences between the Western and
Islamic worlds: the West views economic matters only through the lens of
certain macroeconomic indicators, while people of the MENA region are likely to
consider other, less measurable, aspects of economic life. Given the on-going
economic difficulties in the Western world, Mr Chbaatou believed the Western
model had serious flaws, and therefore should not be copied blindly. Mr Karlsson
partly agreed that there are different ways to gage economic success and he
cited the Chinese model as an example. That said, all of these models are
“integrational” and based on the system’s capacity to facilitate the exchange
of goods, services, capital and labour. He challenged the MENA region to
embrace this “integrational” approach and, in effect to become a “new BRIC”.
SECURITY CHALLENGES IN THE MIDDLE EAST AFTER THE
ARAB SPRING
The seminar continued the next day with the
session dedicated to the developments in the Middle East. The session was
chaired by Jean-Michel Boucheron (France), former Vice-president of the NATO
Parliamentary Assembly and former Chairman of the GSM.
The first speaker, Professor. Eric Hooglund from
the Centre for Middle Eastern Studies at Lund University, discussed the Iranian
perspective on the Arab uprisings through the lens of the Iranian media. He
argued that several narratives have emerged in the Iranian media reflecting
markedly different perspectives. Mr Khamenei expressed the ‘official’ Iranian
interpretation of these events in April 2011, when he stated that the uprisings
embodied ‘Islamic objectives and orientation’. The Iranian leadership saw these
events either as inspired by Iran’s own revolution in 1978-79 or as a reaction
to Western-imposed dictators. At the same time, non-official narratives have
also emerged, claiming that the uprisings were inspired by the 2009 protests in
Iran and represent a genuine popular yearning for freedom and democracy. For different
reasons, the Iranian media has largely welcomed the Arab uprisings. It has
approached events in Syria in a very different manner. Dr. Hooglund suggested
that there is no consensus, among the Iranian leadership as to whether Alawis
should be considered legitimate members of the Shia sect or heretics. Dr.
Hooglund concluded by saying that Iran has not become a model for the countries
of the region due to the distinction between Arab and Iranian nationalism as
well as sectarian factors in Iran’s foreign policy.
Dr Alan George, discussed developments in Syria
and their impact on the Arab world. He noted that the case of Syria is more
complex than that of Libya: the former is much more heterogeneous than the
latter in terms of ethnic and religious composition. The legacy of ‘Greater
Syria’ should also be taken into account: the current Syrian borders do not
conform to what many Syrians consider their historic borders and many leaders
in Damascus have never fully accepted the separation of Lebanon and other
territories from their sovereign control. It is important not to compare the
situation in Syria with that of Libya. Bashar al-Assad had – and still has –
more allies than Gaddafi, including Iran, Hezbollah, Russia and China. Bagdad
is also increasingly well disposed towards al-Assad as a result of closer
relations between Iran and Iraq and a common enemy – Sunni Jihadist fighters
moving across the Iraqi-Syrian border.
Taking all these factors into account, Dr George
said that it would be mistaken to expect the armed conflict in Syria to end any
time soon. Both sides view this conflict as a matter of survival; each side
fears annihilation should the other prevail. At the time of the seminar, the
conflict had resulted in the deaths of an estimated 13 thousand people, with
roughly 220 thousand Syrians incarcerated and 65 thousands missing, according
to the Syrian opposition. Instability is providing fertile ground for jihadist
extremists, and a humanitarian catastrophe is almost inevitable unless the
international community takes action. Dr George called for an “intelligent
international intervention” which would shorten the conflict, make it less
bloody and ‘less Jihadist’ in character. Several participants, however, worried
that the Syrian opposition was too fragmented and that an intervention might
only trigger further instability.
The next speaker, Lahcen Biyjeddigen,
Vice-president of the Assembly of Councillors, Morocco, praised the Arab
Awakening as a manifestation of the people’s determination to take their future
in their own hands. The Moroccan people, he suggested, believe in the wisdom of
their Tunisian, Libyan and Egyptian brothers, and hope that these countries
will develop into true democracies in a peaceful manner. The Moroccan
government, he said, has undertaken serious measures to meet the demands of the
people, to strengthen democratic mechanisms and to protect human rights,
including gender rights. Mr Biyjeddigen also expressed his deep regret
concerning the drama unfolding in Syria. Morocco supports the ‘Annan plan’. The
speaker also called on the NATO Parliamentary Assembly to help implement the
Arab League’s resolutions on Syria. He noted, however, that security cannot
achieved by force alone; civil society should play a bigger role in transition.
Mr Biyjeddigen also stressed that one should not overlook other threats in the
region – the problem of Palestine and Israel’s continuing violation of existing
agreements.
The seminar continued with a discussion on the
Israeli-Palestinian issue. The two guest speakers –Sammy Ravel, and Ilan
Halevi,– both called for efforts to break the current stalemate in peace talks.
The discussions, however, highlighted the profound divergences between both
sides on key issues relating to the delineation of borders, Israeli
settlements, the return of Palestinian refugees, internal divisions among
Palestinians and the role of Hamas, among others.
Mr Ravel warned that his country faces myriad
threats including rockets attacks from Gaza, terrorism inside its borders and
an existential threat arising out of Iran’s nuclear programme. Despite these
challenges, there is a political consensus in Israel that any final settlement
ought to include a two-state solution, he assured participants. He also
stressed that the Arab uprisings provide an opportunity to build peace in the
region and reiterated Israel’s support for all those who seek democracy and
dignity. Uncertainties exist however, and the stability of the region will
depend to a large extent on the outcome of the on-going struggle between
democratic and radical forces in the Arab world. The international community
should be open to dialogue with new governments in the region as long as
certain red lines – including protection of minorities, gender rights and
observation of peace accords with Israel – are not violated.
On the question of Palestine, Mr Ravel reiterated
Israel’s willingness to compromise. All parties in Israel support creation of a
Palestinian state. Israel has imposed a moratorium on settlement building. It
also launched a number of economic development projects, believing that a
strong economy is an essential precondition for peace. Palestinians living in
Israel enjoy all fundamental human rights and freedoms. Unfortunately, Mr Ravel
said, Palestinian leaders are still not ready to recognise the state of Israel.
The speaker urged the Palestinian authorities to resume negotiations with
Israel without preconditions.
Palestinian representatives strongly disagreed
with some of the points Mr Ravel made. In particular, they challenged Israel’s
human rights record and commitment to democratic norms that do not seem to
apply to Palestinians living there. They also argued that the rise of Hamas is
a result of Israel’s reluctance to settle issues through negotiations. Mr
Al-Tarawneh, President of PAM, said that the Arab world is prepared to fully
recognize the state of Israel, but within borders determined by earlier
international treaties.
Some members of the Assembly, however, urged
Israel’s neighbours to respect its right to sovereignty and security. They
regretted that the rhetoric used the Palestinian media with regard to Israel
which is often extremely hostile. They also noted that the Euro-Atlantic
community and Israel share the same values.
Mr Halevi fully agreed that negotiations are the
only way forward, but said that for talks to be fruitful they should be based
on earlier international agreements, including the Oslo Accords. The Israeli
settlements in Palestine are not only illegal from an international legal
perspective, but they also constitute a major obstacle in the negotiations –
something that the US Administration fully recognises.
Mr Halevi indicated that the government in
Palestine is dedicated to the goals of non-violence, improved governance, economic
development, bringing the West Bank and Gaza under one jurisdiction and
strengthening diplomatic outreach. Mr Halevi mentioned Palestine’s recent
achievement of becoming a member of UNESCO. The key, he said, is to exert
non-violent pressure on Israel. He also called on all sides to refrain from
demonising their counterparts. Although he is a representative of Fatah, Mr
Halevi maintained that reconciliation with Hamas was necessary for the sake of
a unified and pluralist Palestine. Ignoring Hamas would be counterproductive,
particularly as this organization has now adopted a more moderate stance and
the majority of its members support the principle of non-violence, Mr Halevi
said.
The speaker ended his presentation by calling for
NATO to secure the borders between Palestinian lands and Israel, even prior to
any final delineation of borders produced by an eventual peace settlement. Mr
Halevi conveyed this proposal on behalf of President Abbas, who, he said,
believes that, were NATO to undertake such a mission, it would make a genuine
contribution to peace in the Middle East.
THE ARAB SPRING: IMPLICATIONS FOR THE ARABIAN
PENINSULA
This session, chaired by Senator Nathalie Goulet
(France), a member of the French delegation to the NATO PA, featured a
presentation made by Fatiha Dazi-Héni, who spoke on the impact of the Arab
Spring on the Gulf countries’ regional policy.
Ms Dazi-Héni noted that the fall of President
Mubarak and his ‘abandonment’ by his principal ally the United States had
traumatized leaders of other US allies in the Gulf. Saudi Arabia, in
particular, began raising questions regarding its status as one of the key pillars
of the US foreign policy in the region. When threatened, the six Gulf
monarchies tend to tighten links among each other– hence the recent initiatives
to transform the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) and endow it with a stronger
voice on matters of defence and security.
The speaker mentioned the proactive role that
Qatar has been playing. This is a small country, but it sits on the world’s
third largest reserve of natural gas. Using diplomacy, financial power and Al
Jazeera, Qatar is able to punch above its weight in the Arab world. It is
partly filling a vacuum created by Egypt’s current inward focus. Qatar is
helping to articulate the ambitions of the Arab Spring, which is ironic because
it is one of the more autocratic countries in the region.
Ms Dazi-Heni also discussed the failed uprising in
Bahrain, where the Shia majority feels that it suffers discrimination. She
argued that the uprising has socio-economic and political rather than sectarian
roots. However, Saudi Arabia saw the insurrection in Bahrain as reflecting, at
least in part, Iranian ambitions in the region. Saudi Arabian leaders feel that
the US has partly abandoned them and so they have pushed for a stronger GCC as
a tool to counter Iranian ambitions. The GCC was also employed to settle the
conflict in Yemen. The consolidation of Saudi- and Iranian-led blocs in the
region is an important if not fully appreciated consequence of the Arab Spring,
Ms Dazi-Heni argued. The tension between these two blocs is increasing,
particularly as a result of the Syrian conflict.
According to the speaker, Saudi Arabia’s internal
situation ought to be watched closely. As long as oil prices are high, that
country will have sufficient capital to buy off discontent and focus its
energies on the region. However, some worrisome structural problems are
building up in the country’s economy and society. Unemployment is rising and
Saudi Arabia’s young people find it increasingly difficult to pursue meaningful
careers. The use of modern communication technologies is growing, spreading
awareness among the people of the opportunities they might be missing under the
current political system. While regime is still very strong and a mass protest
movement is unlikely in the near future, the underlying trends should not be
neglected and potential instability in Saudi Arabia should not be ruled out, Ms
Dazi-Heni said.
CHANGING SOCIAL DYNAMICS: WOMEN, YOUTH AND NEW
MEDIA
The session was chaired by Senator Joëlle
Garriaud-Maylam (France), member of the French delegation to the NATO PA.
The presentation of the first panellist, Dr Maria
Holt, Senior Lecturer at the University of Westminster, was titled “Women and
the Arab Spring”. She said that the Arab Spring has challenged the
stereotypical view of Arab women as ‘veiled, homebound and uneducated’: women’s
role in the uprisings has been consequential. However, it is not yet clear if
women’s activism will translate into enhanced political power. Dr Holt stressed
that women’s participation was not a new phenomenon but rather a continuation
of female activism in the Arab world.
The speaker also argued that it is the tradition
of patriarchy, not Islam, that lies behind the oppression of women. Many women
in the Arab world have been nervous about appearing in the public space for
fear of social disapproval or even physical violence. She noted that in order
to improve their status in the society, some Arab women prefer to adopt Islamic
discourse instead of Western feminist jargon.
Dr Holt regretted that although there has been
some progress, women in most Arab countries lag behind men in terms of
literacy, participation in the work force and presence in the political sphere.
The representation of women in national parliaments in the Arab states is
around 10% - the lowest figure in the world. Only 2% of the members of the new
Egyptian parliament are female. The virtual absence of the female voice in
state affairs is a common feature in the region.
The speaker also criticised Western policies
toward the region prior to the Arab Spring. These policies did little to make
the MENA region more democratic, and their support of autocratic regimes
contributed to consolidation of forces that tend to exclude women. Dr Holt
urged Western countries to learn from these mistakes and to support the choices
Arab women make, even if these choices have Islamic connotations.
The second panellist, Lin Noueihed, journalist and
Middle East specialist with Reuters, focused mostly on the media situation in
the region. She argued that the media space has been opening up slowly already
prior to the Arab Spring, despite the old regimes’ attempts to control the
media through censorship or by owning media outlets.
Independent satellite TV stations have mushroomed
in the region. The role and popularity of Al Jazeera is difficult to
overestimate. These developments have recast the way people consume news and
perceive politics in their own countries. According to surveys, 85% of
population in the MENA region rely on TV for information, and 78% watch Al
Jazeera.
The Internet has become an important source of
information. It is difficult for governments in the region to control the
myriad bloggers and individual users exchanging information online. The use of
smartphones has also grown remarkably, allowing people to receive up-to-date
information anywhere. These trends began years before the Arab Spring,
especially among the youth – the majority of the Arab population who already
grew up in the world of satellite TV and the Internet.
Social media did galvanise activists as well as
instantly and cheaply reaching significant numbers of people all over the world
and it exposed government sponsored violence. Nevertheless, Ms Noueihed
questioned the use of terms such as “Twitter” or “Facebook revolutions” in
reference to the Arab uprisings. In 2010, Facebook penetration in the region
was only 6%. Even in Tunisia, only 17% of the public used Facebook by the end
2010. Drastic measures to shut down the Internet were taken during the
uprisings, but the demonstrations were not undermined. One should not therefore
overestimate the role of the Internet and social media, the speaker said.
SECURITY SECTOR REFORM IN THE MENA REGION
The session was chaired by Julio Miranda Cahla
(Portugal), Vice-president of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly.
Security sector reform is a burning issue for the
majority of the counties in the MENA region, according Barah Mikail, Senior
researcher DCAF. The sense of insecurity in the region is growing, and the role
of the military in this context ought to be closely monitored. With the
exception of Libya, Iraq and Bahrain, the military is often the only force that
can act in order to ensure public safety at the times of profound
transformation. In a democratic society, the army should withdraw from politics
as soon as it is possible. However, it remains to be seen if the armed forces
of the Arab countries will lower their profile as transition progresses.
The speaker predicted that military will remain a
significant factor in foreign and domestic politics of most of the Arab
countries. The Euro-Atlantic community should continue to co-operate with them
on a number of issues ranging from military training to logistics, but
co-operation projects must be executed in a prudent manner taking into account
the sensitivities and tensions between the military and some segments of
society.
Mr Simon Lunn, asked if the NATO Parliamentary
Assembly’s experience in supporting democratic oversight of the armed forces in
Eastern and Central Europe might offer potential lessons for relations with the
MENA region. He noted that transitions of the CEE and MENA countries are
entirely different in time, circumstance and geography. It is worth noting as
well that the countries of the region are not aspiring to NATO membership. This
is a crucial distinction as it determines the degree to which these societies
are prepared to embrace Western offers of advice and assistance. It is also
important to remember that in several countries in the region NATO is viewed
with deep suspicion. There are nevertheless certain similarities and areas of
commonality.
The most obvious potential parallel with the
Assembly’s experience in the 90’s lies in the requirement for defence and
security sector reform. The countries of the region face similar problems in civil
and military relations insofar as their armed forces have developed apart from
the societies they protect. They have each in their own way occupied special
roles and positions in which democratic oversight and accountability has been
entirely lacking and unwanted at least by the military. There is also the same
dearth of qualified civilians with defence experience and parliaments with very
limited powers of scrutiny and oversight, and even less experience and
expertise to exercise it.
Mr Lunn noted that there is always room for
parliamentary diplomacy, i.e. reaching out to the parliaments of the region,
including them in regular activities and facilitating contacts and dialogue.
But this requires diplomacy and sensitivity to local and regional sensibilities.
Mr Lunn also highlighted the importance of co-ordination with other
international organisations in providing assistance in order to avoid
duplication and maximise the effectiveness of the contributions.
Mr Lunn noted that it is possible to identify a
role for the NATO Assembly in which it would make available its collective
resources to these countries and their parliaments during this crucial period
of transition by facilitating their closer involvement in regular or special
activities. As in the 90’s, an Assembly approach could support or reinforce
NATO’s own partnership programme, in this case the Mediterranean Dialogue and
the Gulf Cooperation Initiative, particularly those aspects which relate to
soft security. This could follow the experiences of the 90’s adjusted or
tailored to the specificity of the region and to the particular countries.
The situation in the MENA region is one of
fluidity, change and opportunity. Progress will ultimately depend on the
creation of a stable and secure environment. The Assembly’s experience in
helping create the conditions for such an environment could again be relevant.
Some form of response would be in the interests of all concerned and to do
something would in this instance be better than to do nothing, Mr Lunn said.
CLOSING SESSION
The final session of the seminar was chaired by
Senator Antonio Cabras (Italy).
Dina Mehlem, representing the Westminster
Foundation for Democracy (WFD), discussed what Europe can do to provide
assistance to the parliaments of the MENA region. She stressed that prior to
the Arab Spring, democratic assistance to MENA parliaments was a challenging
task because most parliaments lacked real pluralism and acted as rubber stamp
for their governments. Following the Arab Spring, the role of parliaments has
increased considerably. Most parliaments are engaged in reform processes to
ensure that they live up to their citizens’ expectations.
The region’s parliaments face a number of
challenges, including the high number of inexperienced new MPs having to deal
urgently with an overloaded agenda. The lack of properly trained parliamentary
staff is another serious issue.
The organisation Ms Mehlem is representing – WFD,
funded by the British government – is managing a large number of projects in
Lebanon, Iraq, Morocco, Tunisia and Egypt. For instance, WFD helped to
establish advisory units in the parliaments of Iraq and Lebanon designed to
support MPs with expert analysis and studies. WFD also helps the parliaments of
the region to develop consolidated parliamentary ethics systems in order to
enhance transparency and fight corruption. WFD programmes also helps these
parliament to develop and strengthen their oversight and accountability
mechanisms.
In her concluding remarks, Ms Mehlem stressed that
parliamentary assistance programmes must be designed in close consultation with
MENA parliaments and tailored specifically to the needs of the countries
concerned. These programmes also require understanding of the overall
governance context. Good political analysis needs to be undertaken in the
planning phase. In order to achieve meaningful results, long-term commitment is
needed, Ms Mehlem said.
François Duluc, Chief of Parliamentary Assistance
at the National Assembly of France, discussed the French experience in
co-operating with the MENA parliaments. France has a very long history of
parliamentary relations with the region, Mr Duluc said. The National Assembly,
together with the Senate of France, provide considerable technical and legal
support to most of these parliaments, with the exception of Iran, Iraq and
Libya. In case of the latter, France is closely following the developments and
is prepared, if there is a request, to extend its assistance to the new
parliament of Libya after the upcoming elections. The assistance is mostly
intellectual rather than financial, because most of these countries are not
impoverished.
The speaker also noted that France works directly
with MENA parliaments rather than through international organisations or NGOs.
The assistance is provided not only by experts and senior officials working in
the National Assembly, but sometimes by MPs – including former MPs. France’s
approach is pragmatic, not ideological; it does not try to impose its own model
of parliamentary democracy on these countries, Mr Duluc said.
Mohamed Abbou, Vice-president of the Assembly of
Representatives of Morocco, presented the Moroccan perspective on the
development of parliamentary system. He highlighted the importance of changes
occurring in the region where people rose to protect their dignity and the
right to participate in the decision-making process. Morocco has opted for the
pluralist model, based on extensive political, economic and human liberties.
The King of Morocco’s willingness to listen to the people and to meet their
demands ensured that the democratic legitimacy was secured. After a thorough
and inclusive debate, a new constitution was adopted in 2011. It vested more
powers in parliament and emphasised the value of tolerance. The new
Constitution enjoys enormous support of the people, Mr Abbou said.
He also noted that the Moroccan parliament is
eager to learn from the experience of other parliaments. Through seminars,
workshops, training courses and other assistance programmes conducted in
co-operation with the Council of Europe, WFD and other international
organisations as well as individual countries, the Moroccan parliament’s
capacities have been considerably enhanced. Mr Abbou also noted that the NATO
PA could also make an important contribution to the democracy building effort
in the region.
Suadad Najim, representing the League of Arab
States, discussed the League's role in developing democracy in the Arab World.
The Arab revolutions, she noted, were an inspirational event for all Arabs;
they provided an opportunity for the people to build their own future and to
live in dignity and justice.
While political change in Tunisia, Egypt and Yemen
occurred in a relatively swift fashion, Libya and Syria have suffered through
civil wars. The brutality of the Libyan tyrant compelled the League to act. The
League chose to abandon its traditional focus on the principle of state
sovereignty and to replace it with a focus on aspirations of the Arab people
for freedom. The League suspended Libya’s membership. It was the first time the
League took such measures against a member state due to human rights violations
committed by the government. The Arab League endorsed efforts to apply pressure
to end Gaddafi’s repressive regime and called on the international community to
implement a no-fly zone over Libya, which led to a UN resolution. Without the
Arab League, Gaddafi would still be in power, Ms Najim argued. The League has
also imposed sanctions on the Syrian regime.
The speaker welcomed the international community’s
concern with regards to human and political rights in the Arab world. However,
she urged the international community to extend this concern to include the
people of Palestine who are victims of injustice, Ms Najim said.
The final presentation of the session and of the
seminar was made by Georgi Kandelaki, Head of the Georgian Delegation to the
NATO PA, who spoke on the lessons learned from the Georgian transition and
their potential relevance for the MENA region. He noted that the Georgian case
is interesting and relevant, because within the course of several years that
country managed to move from being a failed state to a frontrunner in many
respects.
Between 1991 and 2003, the situation in Georgia
could be characterised by wars, corruption, crime, oversized and ineffective
institutions, poverty and a lack of energy sources. Since then the government
has adopted a range of radical reforms. Georgia’s law enforcement system was so
defective that the government decided to fire the entire police force and to
recruit new people through a transparent competition. The size of police force
was reduced 5 times while the salaries were increased 5 times. Corruption was
attacked everywhere at once. Publicised punishment for bribery and a ruthless
crackdown on organised crime sent the message that corruption would not be
tolerated. The results followed swiftly: within the following several years,
crime rates declined by 48% (murders by 68%). Public trust in police
skyrocketed from almost zero to astounding 87%. Corruption perceptions
decreased dramatically and is now at the average European level.
A drastic reduction of corruption and crime had a
positive effect on the business climate. In addition, the government simplified
the tax system, reduced the overall tax burden and streamlined the bureaucracy.
In a survey measuring the “ease of doing business”, Georgia moved from the bottom
of the country list to the 16th in the world. Mr Kandelaki stressed that all
these achievements were only possible because the Georgians had strong
political will and determination to change their country.
The Chairman Mr Cabras closed the seminar, thanking
all the speakers and particularly the French delegation and the region
Provence-Alpes-Côte d’Azur for the warm reception in Marseilles and all the
hard work that made this seminar possible.
Respectfully submitted,
Mrs. Cheryl Gallant, M.P. Chair,
Canadian NATO Parliamentary Association (NATO PA)